Talk:Colonial Military Administration
Untitled Wheres the second portion of this article coming from? It has no heading, nor source. -- Manticore Talk | 10:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC) It looks to be a modified version of the UN charterhttp://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/: WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, AND FOR THESE ENDS to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS I was wondering and I thought wounldn't Central command be like the J.C.S, joint cheifs of staff. HIGHCOM never had any Army generals only the M.C and Navy if you think about its only the navy due to the M.C being apart of it Central Command could be located at earth. now the Colonial Military Adminstration Could be runned by generals/admirals or the UEG's form of Congress or both Hrmmm... Does anyone know how: FLEETCOM, CENTCOM, and HIGHCOM rank in respect to eachother? Steve2frag 19:53, 25 March 2009 (UTC) HIGHCOM, then FLEETCOM... no one is sure where CENTCOM fits in, but like the Colonial Administration Authority. it was likely fallen by the wayside as the UNSC took over the Role of the the UEG. -WhellerNG 04:29, 26 July 2009 (UTC) ORION Please, stop adding in that the CMA started it in 2491. That was ONI. The CMA did their own project in 2321, according to the Halo Encyclopedia. Kthnxbai. -- Sergeant Major Avery JohnsonChatter 05:19, April 18, 2010 (UTC) :Yes and no. I've just realized that unfortunately the Halo Encyclopedia includes contradictory information on the subject. As you write, it states that on page 80-81, that the CMA launched it in 2321 and ONI in 2491. BUT, pages 44-45 and 67 say the exact opposite. They state that the project was launched in 2321 by ONI and resurrected in 2491 by the CMA before being absorbed back into ONI after Operation: CHARLEMAGNE. I assume you have a copy, and I urge you to double check my findings.-- [[User:Rusty-112|''' Rusty ]][[User talk:Rusty-112|- ]][[User:Rusty-112|'112 ']]05:28, April 18, 2010 (UTC) Meh, I don't. I'm going off of what's sourced on other pages. It seems to make more sense that it was started by the CMA in 2321, and by ONI again in 2491, not the other way around, considering the fact that all canon seems to point towards ONI making it in 2491, not the CMA, especially when you consider that the known personnel used were in the United Nations Space Command, not the CMA. The Halo Encyclopedia is weird, I know. -- Sergeant Major Avery JohnsonChatter 05:47, April 18, 2010 (UTC) :Yeah. I suggest we get someone else with a copy in on this conversation. See what other people think.-- [[User:Rusty-112| Rusty ]][[User talk:Rusty-112| - ]][[User:Rusty-112| 112 ''']] 05:53, April 18, 2010 (UTC)